Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 9453074
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Rickey Reed v. City of Culver City
No. 9453074 · Decided December 18, 2023
No. 9453074·Ninth Circuit · 2023·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
December 18, 2023
Citation
No. 9453074
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 18 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RICKEY B. REED, No. 22-56099
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:19-cv-10526-JAK-RAO
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CITY OF CULVER CITY,
Defendant-Appellee,
and
MEGHAN SAHLI WELLS; et al.,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
John A. Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 12, 2023**
Before: WALLACE, LEE, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges
Rickey B. Reed appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
for Culver City in his federal and state law employment discrimination action. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Freyd v. Univ. of
Or., 990 F.3d 1211, 1219 (9th Cir. 2021). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Reed failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he was qualified for the
position, or whether the proffered legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for failing
to hire Reed was pretextual. See Freyd, 990 F.3d at 1228 (discussing burden-
shifting framework of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973));
Merrick v. Hilton Worldwide, Inc., 867 F.3d 1139, 1145 (9th Cir. 2017) (analyzing
state claims of discrimination under same framework as federal claims); Dickson v.
Burke Williams, Inc., 184 Cal. Rptr. 3d 774, 781, 783 (Ct. App. 2015) (explaining
that an actionable claim for failure to prevent discrimination requires an actionable
claim of discrimination).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett
v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 22-56099
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 18 2023 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 18 2023 MOLLY C.
02MEMORANDUM* CITY OF CULVER CITY, Defendant-Appellee, and MEGHAN SAHLI WELLS; et al., Defendants.
03Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 12, 2023** Before: WALLACE, LEE, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges Rickey B.
04Reed appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 18 2023 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Rickey Reed v. City of Culver City in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on December 18, 2023.
Use the citation No. 9453074 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.